Watson v. Jones

Citation980 F.2d 1165
Decision Date01 December 1992
Docket NumberNo. 92-2034,92-2034
PartiesJoseph WATSON; Bill Harris, Appellants, v. Marie JONES, Appellee.
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)

Page 1165

980 F.2d 1165
Joseph WATSON; Bill Harris, Appellants,
Marie JONES, Appellee.
No. 92-2034.
United States Court of Appeals,
Eighth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 9, 1992.
Decided Dec. 1, 1992.

Joseph Watson and Bill Harris, pro se.

Robert J. Krehbiel and Donna S. Morrison, St. Louis, Mo., argued, for appellee.


BEAM, Circuit Judge.

Joseph Watson and Bill Harris, Missouri inmates, appeal the district court's grant of summary judgment to defendant Jones in their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 case. We reverse and remand.

In a verified complaint, Watson and Harris alleged that Jones, a female corrections officer, performed almost daily routine pat-down searches for the two months preceding November 2, 1990, that consisted of tickling and "a deliberate examination of the genital, anus, lower stomach and thigh areas." They alleged that, when they informed Jones that they wished to be

Page 1166

searched by male guards, Jones retaliated by citing them for false disciplinary violations. They further alleged that, when they refused to be searched by Jones, they were placed in the "hole." They attached to their complaint conduct violation reports: Harris's indicates that he stated to the interviewing officer that he refused the pat-down search and had made complaints about Jones "being sexually harassing."

Jones moved for summary judgment. In an affidavit in support, Jones attested that, during the two-month period in question she patted down plaintiffs only six to seven times; she pats down inmates in accordance with procedure; she never pats an inmate in the crotch area unless she "know[s] something is there"; she never touches an inmate's genital, anal, or upper thigh area; and she has touched an inmate's lower stomach with the back of her hands in accordance with procedure. Plaintiffs' response essentially reiterated the allegations in their complaint, adding that Jones's searches included "prolonged rubbing and fondling of the genitals and anus area"; her searches violated their Fourth Amendment rights; and they did not refuse pat-down searches by Jones because of her gender, but because of her "ongoing sexual advances toward them."

The district court granted Jones's motion for summary judgment, finding that the inmates had made only broad, conclusory allegations of sexual harassment, while Jones, in her affidavit, swore that she had not conducted any improper pat searches.


To continue reading

Request your trial
74 cases
  • Greiner v. City of Champlin
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota
    • 9 Marzo 1993
    ...cannot satisfy plaintiffs' burden of showing that Penney violated Greiner's clearly established constitutional rights. Watson v. Jones, 980 F.2d 1165, 1166 (8th Cir.1992); Roach v. Teamsters Local Union No. 688, 595 F.2d 446, 451 (8th Cir.1979). Therefore, defendants are entitled to qualifi......
  • Bearchild v. Cobban
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • 16 Enero 2020
    ...her for sex, had intruded upon her while she was not fully dressed, and had subjected her to sexual comments"); and Watson v. Jones , 980 F.2d 1165, 1165 (8th Cir. 1992) (considering claim by two male inmates that female correctional officer routinely "fondled them during pat-down searches"......
  • Smith v. Cochran
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Oklahoma
    • 9 Mayo 2001
    ...that the alleged sexual abuse was egregious and pervasive, a claim under the Eighth Amendment can be made. See e.g. Watson v. Jones, 980 F.2d 1165, 1165-66 (8th Cir.1992). In fact, an inmate may state an Eighth Amendment constitutional claim under § 1983 for sexual harassment if it was suff......
  • Mathie v. Fries, CV 91-0176(ADS).
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • 5 Agosto 1996
    ...state of mind. See Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. at 6-7, 112 S.Ct. at 998-99. That is the case here. Id. at 4. In Watson v. Jones, 980 F.2d 1165 (8th Cir.1992) allegations that a female corrections officer performed pat down searches of male inmates that consisted of "a deliberate examinati......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Watson v. Jones
    • United States
    • Carolina Academic Press Significant Prisoner Rights Cases (CAP)
    • Invalid date
    ...v. Jones 980 F. 2d 1165 Facts Missouri Eastern Correctional Center inmates Joseph Watson and Bill Harris brought suit to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri alleging that Correctional Officer Marie Jones violated their Fourth Amendment rights by sexually harassing t......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT